Premier Parking County Court Defence

Coupon-mad

3.            On arriving at the car park, the Defendant paid £1 to cover 5 hours of parking based on the information on the entrance and on display. The Defendant works with the Birmingham Women and Children Hospital and was attending a meeting at a nearby building with the Birmingham Children Trust. The Defendant found the payment information with an extra  payment stating 12 hours at 3.20 and up to 24 hours £3.50 to contradict signage/ advert at the entrance “20 pence per hour and £2.40 all day for parking”. However, due to time pressure to attend a meeting and   reasonably relied upon the '20p per hour' advertised rate.  The fact that both entrance signage and payment information shows “20p an hour and £2.40 all-day” guided the Defendant to the belief that he has paid the right amount to cover 3 hours with an extra 2 hours excess to cover for a probable delay.

PChallenger

Coupon-mad said:

No, you do not admit to seeing the two signs, you talk about believing the entrance sign advertised rate:

3.            On arriving at the car park, the Defendant paid £1 to cover 5 hours of parking based on the information on the entrance and on display. The Defendant works with the Birmingham Women and Children Hospital and was attending a meeting at a nearby building with the Birmingham Children Trust. The Defendant found the payment information with an extra  payment stating 12 hours at 3.20 and up to 24 hours £3.50 to contradict signage/ advert at the entrance “20 pence per hour and £2.40 all day for parking”. However, due to time pressure to attend a meeting and   reasonably relied upon the '20p per hour' advertised rate.  The fact that both entrance signage and payment information shows “20p an hour and £2.40 all-day” guided the Defendant to the belief that he has paid the right amount to cover 3 hours with an extra 2 hours excess to cover for a probable delay.

Good afternoon @Co@Coupon-mad, thank you for the review. I have updated the statement:

The facts as known to the Defendant:

2.        It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question, but liability is denied. As of 2nd March 2020, the signage on the entrance of the Car Park at 66 Cecil Street, Birmingham, B19 3SU stated, “20 pence per hour and £2.40 all day for parking”.

3.            On arriving at the car park, the Defendant paid £1 to cover 5 hours of parking based on the information on the entrance and on display. The Defendant works with the Birmingham Women and Children Hospital and was attending a meeting at a nearby building with the Birmingham Children Trust. The Defendant reasonably relied upon the '20p per hour' advertised rate.  The fact that both entrance signage and payment information shows “20p an hour and £2.40 all-day” guided the Defendant to the belief that he has paid the right amount to cover 3 hours with an extra 2 hours excess to cover for a probable delay.

Fruitcake

Google Street View from 2016 shows other tariffs between the 2 hours and 12 hours charges on the yellow sign, and the sign from your first post shows that there is still a trace of the writing. This suggests that the signs have been vandalised at some point. I wonder if the landowner is aware of this.

There is nothing on that huge entrance sign to suggest any rates exist other than the two advertised at the entrance. In Thornton vs Shoe Lane, Lord Denning stated that conditions could not be applied after the ticket was issued. 

There is no mention of any other charges on the main entrance sign, and the hourly rate has not changed from 20p since 2016 although the daily rate has.

S69 of CRA 2015 says:

69 Contract terms that may have different meanings
(1) If a term in a consumer contract, or a consumer notice, could have different meanings, the meaning that is most favourable to the consumer is to prevail.

Since the charge for two hours is double the charge for one hour, it would be reasonable for the consumer and the man on the Clapham omnibus to assume that the cost for three, four, and five hours would be three, four, and five times the tariff for one hour, until a different tariff was reached at twelve hours.
This is the meaning that is most favourable to the consumer, and irrespective of what is printed on the ticket, it is the meaning that should prevail according to the above Act.
To use the scammer's own words, "You can not make your own tariff up."

PChallenger

Hey guys,
I hope you are all doing great. I submitted the defence statement on the 23rd of December 2020, Premier lawyer contacted me on the 20th of January 2021 to say they intend to proceed with the claim, however nothing from the court. Is this normal?

I appreciate you guys, for helping us all.
Best wishes.

KeithP

Have you checked your MCOL claim history?

You appear to be waiting for a Directions Questionnaire to be sent to you by the CCBC.

PChallenger

Many thanks @KeithP, 
I have just checked tonight and these are the  I have on my screen;
Claim History

• Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 29/11/2020 at 10:44:26
• Your acknowledgment of service was received on 30/11/2020 at 01:12:13
• Your defence was received on 23/12/2020

Thank you

Redx

there is no court yet, only the CCBC , there cannot possibly be a court allocated until your DQ is returned with your nominated court on it (think about it)

when the CCBC decide to issue the DQ, your claim history will change, so whatever PP have sent to you, it appears that they havent sorted out the CCBC with the intention to proceed, so wait and see what happens and keep checking MCOL every few days to see if a DQ gets posted , or not. better to let sleeping dogs lie

KeithP

That does seem rather a long while.
Might be a good idea to ring the CCBC and ask them what's happened.

You will have received a letter from the CCBC telling you that they have sent your Defence to the Claimant. I'm guessing, but it looks like the Claimant hasn't indicated to the CCBC that they wish to continue.

Coupon-mad

It worries me when this happens, remembering the 2018 cases that BW Legal left dormant and then paid to lift the stays and pursue people again in 2020 without even having to check that the person hadn't moved.

nosferatu1001

Indeed, its not good. So, OP CHECK WITH THE CCBC
If they dont respond within 28 days saying they wish to proceed, a stay is applied. They can pay £100 to lift that stay potentially years later.